Search for: "Doe v. Superior Court" Results 7021 - 7040 of 8,637
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Jun 2010, 1:04 pm by Michael Webster
Karakatsanis of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting as the Divisional Court, dated April 27, 2009.ARMSTRONG J.A. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 4:18 am
 (IP Watch) More on new gTLDs (ipwars) New gTLD draft applicant guidebook, v 4 and ‘An Economic Framework for the Analysis of gTLDs’ (Trademark Blog)   Brazil Billion dollar damages for improper use of software – will the Superior Court of Justice uphold the first instance decision? [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 3:23 am
As the Taylor decision indicates [Taylor v Cass, 505 NYS2d 929], in such a situation the individual will be reinstated with back salary.The Taylor court determined that under the terms of Taylor's disciplinary probation, he could be terminated without any hearing if, in the opinion of his superior, Taylor's job performance was "adversely affected" by his "intoxication on the job. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 5:59 pm by Duncan
 (IP Watch) More on new gTLDs (ipwars) New gTLD draft applicant guidebook, v 4 and ‘An Economic Framework for the Analysis of gTLDs’ (Trademark Blog) Brazil Billion dollar damages for improper use of software – will the Superior Court of Justice uphold the first instance decision? [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 1:46 pm by Christopher Simon
The Superior Court, Floyd County, Walther, J., granted summary judgment to restaurant. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 7:23 am by Wilson Kehoe & Winingham
In early 2009, Marion Superior Justice David Dreyer drafted an opinion in John Doe v. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 3:22 am
He asked the court to order his reinstatement with back salary and benefits. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 8:08 am by Moseley Collins
Superior Court, (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 1002, involved a mother's claim for NIED caused by a medically caused stillbirth. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 3:58 am by Rebecca Tushnet
They remain confidential, as does the challenge proceeding as a whole. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 9:38 am by Lyle Denniston
Justice Scalia, though typically exaggerating the negative consequences of comments with which he disagreed, was probably close to correct in suggesting that lower court judges and litigating lawyers will focus on the privacy discussion the Court allowed itself to make, rather than the specific legal outcome, in City of Ontario, et al., v. [read post]